Kolkata Court November 1927 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Makbul Ali Chowdhury Vs. Sasi Kumar Malla and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal305a
Mukerji, J.1. The contention that has been urged in this appeal is that the Subordinate Judge was wrong in holding that the tenancy in suit is governed by the Transfer of Property Act and that the Munsif who tried the suit had rightly held that the Bengal Tenancy Act applied to it.2. The subject-matter of the tenancy is a tank with its banks and a plot of land adjoining thereto. It had its origin in a kabuliyat the material portion of which runs in these words:I shall graze cattle on the banks after fencing them all round. I shall rear now fish and catch them and shall not make any objection to your catching the old fish. I shall enjoy the fruits of the fruit-bearing trees now existing on the banks. I shall be entitled to catch fish throughout the year and shall not be competent to raise objection to your catching fish on any festive occasion. If 1 fill up the tank without your permission I shall not be entitled to raise any objection to your getting khas possession of it. I shall alwa...
Maharaj Bahadur Sing of Baluchar Vs. Sachindra Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal328
Suhrawardy, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two execution proceedings in execution of a decree obtained by the respondent opposite party against the appellant and another. The properties involved in these appeals were sold in execution of the decree and the judgment-debtor's objections under Order 21, Rule 90, having failed he has preferred the present appeals. Four properties were put up for sale. Lot 1 was withdrawn as a forma? defect was discovered in the sale proclamation in respect of that property. The sale of property No. 2 was set aside by consent. The sale of lots 3 and 4 has been confirmed by the Court below and Appeal No. 474 of 1925 refers to those lots. Lot 1 was subsequently sold and the sale having been confirmed by the Court below the judgment-debtor has preferred Appeal No. 447 of 1925 in respect of that lot. I will take up for consideration Appeal No. 474 in which most of the papers bearing on both the appeals have been printed. Lot 3 is a garden called Amarbagh. ...
Maharaj Bahadur Singh of Balucher Vs. Sachindra Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1927
Reported in: 113Ind.Cas.562
Zahhadur Rahim Zahid Suhrawardy, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two execution proceedings in execution of a decree obtained by the respondent opposite party against the appellant and another. The properties involved in these appeals were sold in execution of the decree and the judgment-debtor's objections under Order XXI, Rule 90 having failed he has preferred the present appeals. Four properties were put up for sale. Lot No. 1 was withdrawn as a formal defect was discovered in the sale proclamation in respect of that property. The sale of property No. 2 was set aside by consent. The sale of lots Nos. 3 and 4 has been confirmed by the Court below and Appeal No. 474 of 1925 refers to those lots. Lot No. 1 was subsequently sold and the sale having been confirmed by the Court below the judgment-debtor has preferred Appeal No. 447 of 1925 in respect of that lot. I will take up for consideration Appeal No. 474 in which most of the papers bearing on both the appeals have been printed. L...
Madhab Chandra Dutta Vs. Jajnoo Ram and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal231
Mukerji, J.1. This Rule has been issued to show cause why the decree passed by the Small Cause Court Judge of Barpeta, dated 31st March 1927, should not be set aside. The rule has been issued at the instance of the defendant in a suit. The plaintiff claimed damages from the defendant on the allegations that certain crops which had been grown by him were attached at the instance of the defendant and that subsequently the land was given back to the plaintiff, but that the crops which had been attached were damaged and, in consequence thereof, the plaintiff alleged, he was entitled to recover damages. The defence of the defendant, so far as it was necessary for the purpose of the argument that had been advanced on his behalf was that there was a petition filed by the defendant for proceedings being taken against the plaintiffs under Section 107, Criminal P.C., and that, while the said proceedings were either pending or under contemplation, the paddy standing on the land was attached by th...
Ambar Ali Vs. Piran Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal344
Graham, J.1. In this case a rule was issued calling on the Deputy Commissioner of Sylhet and the opposite party to show cause why the order of the Extra Assistant Commissioner of Sylhet dated 6th December 1926 under Section 145, Criminal P.C., declaring the 2nd party (now the opposite party) to be entitled to retain possession of certain land should not be set aside on the ground that the learned Magistrate erred in law in not upholding the possession delivered to the petitioner (1st party) under a civil Court decree against the opposite party Piran Ali.2. On the particular facts in this case the Magistrate's order is in my opinion manifestly wrong, and he ought, I think, to have maintained the decree of the civil Court, and the possession given by it subsequent thereto Atal Hazra v. Uma Charan [1916] 20 C.W.N. 763, Akhoy Mondal v. Basu Bai A.I.R. 1923 Cal. 176, Kunja v. Khetra [1902] 29 Cal. 208. The petitioner, 1st party, obtained possession of the land in question through the civil ...
Bani Kanta Mondal and ors. Vs. Hemanta Kumar Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal405
Mukerji, J.1. I am of opinion that to accede to the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners in this Rule would be to hold that all suits for recovery of mesne profits against trespassers are outside the cognizance of the Court of Small Causes. Schedule 2, Article 31, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, was construed by this Court prior to the introduction of Clause (ii) of Article 35 in the case of Kunjo Behary Singh v. Madhub Chandra Ghose (1896) 23 Cal. 884 (F.B.), and a Full Bench of this Court held that suits were cognizable by Courts of Small Causes. To find out whether the introduction of Clause (ii) to Article 35 in the said schedule has effected any change in the law it may not be out of place to refer to what was said in that case by Trevelyan, J. He observed that suits for damages in the nature of mesne profits were cognizable by a Court of Small Causes even under Act 11 of 1865. It would require very strong reasons to suppose that the introduction of Clause (ii) was mad...
Bejoy Lal Seal and ors. Vs. Benarasidas Khandelwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal681
C.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal against a decision of my learned brother Page, J, passed on 14th April 1927. The f Act s, -shortly stated, areas follows : On 23rd August 1900, one Bolai Lai Seal who was the predecessor-in-interest of the present plaintiffs let out the premises in suit then known as No. 7/1, Halliday Street, to the predecessor of defendants 1 and 2 for a term of 61 years on certain terms and conditions specified in the indenture of lease. On 7th May 1923 defendants 1 and 2 mortgaged the leasehold interest in the said premises by way of sub-demise to the defendant 3.On 20th August 1923 the plaintiffs gave notice to the defendants that they regarded the lease of 23rd August 1900 as having been determined by reason of the mortgage of 7th May 1923, which, according to them, operated as a breach by the lessees of a covenant in the lease.2. The present suit was filed on 25th January 1924, in which the plaintiffs prayed for a declaration that the indenture of lease dated 23...
Kanai Lal Saha Vs. Makhan Lal Saha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-24-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal237
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case the learned District Judge of Faridpur has made an order directing that a complaint should be made against the appellant for an offence under Section 195(i)(c), Criminal P.C., in respect that he forged a receipt and used that document in evidence in a, certain suit before the Court of the 2nd Munsif of Goalundo knowing it to be forged.2. The Munsif in the suit found that the receipt was a forgery and the two defendants applied to the Munsif for an order directing that a complaint should be made to a Magistrate against the present appellant. Before that application wag disposed of the judicial officer in question was transferred and the case was by the order of the District Judge transferred to the Court of the first Munsif of Goalundo. That learned Munsif of Goalundo when the matter came before him under Section 476, Criminal P.C., refused to direct a complaint to be made on the view that he had no jurisdiction in the matter, he not being the Court referred ...
Sris Chandra Choudhury Vs. Bhaba Tarini Devi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal695,114Ind.Cas.794
1. This appeal arises out of an application for revocation of a grant of letters of administration which was-made under Section 50 of the Probate and Administration Act now replaced by Section 263, Succession Act of 1925. The letters of administration wore granted with the will annexed of the testator who died in the year 1883. By his will he gave his property to his two grandsons Satis and Sris and he made provisions for payment of annuities to his daughter Bama Sundari and his daughter-in-law Sakhi Sundari. Letters of administration were granted to Bama Sundari in. 1901 and she was administering the estate till her death on 21st June 1923. After the death of Bama Sundari the present opposite party Sris applied for grant of Letters of Administration for the un administered portion of the estate. The present petitioner for revocation objected to it, but letters were granted to the objector Sris on 19th June 1924. The other annuitant Sakhi Sundari died some time in October 1924. The pre...
Bibi Aimana Khatun Vs. Saburannessa Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1927
Reported in: 107Ind.Cas.465
Mukerji, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was instituted by the plaintiff on the allegations that the lands in suit which are described at the foot of the plaint formed part and parcel of a jama of Rs. 32 which at one time belonged to two brothers, Kachimaddi and Madhu Molla, Kachimaddi having two-thirds share Madhu Molla the remaining one-third. The plaintiff's case was that there was a partition between Kachimaddi and Madhu Molla and that the disputed lands together with other lands fell to the share of the latter. Madhu Molla, it is said, died leaving three sons and four daughters and the plaintiff who is one of the daughters became according to the plaintiff, entitled to a twelfth share in the land owned by Madhu and the lands in suit fell in the plaintiff's share on a partition which took place amongst the sons and daughters of Madhu and the plaintiff, therefore, prayed for a declaration of her jote right to the said ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »